About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
. jenna: we researched the pentagon for a independent staff we haven't got it yet. we have the research department said if we had revisions in afghanistan over the years and we haven't found any. they told the associated press doesn't tell the full story of progress against the taliban. >> fair enough. it is a snapshot, not the movie. once again i think it is pretty important when the administration uses this. panetta said last year that attacks were down in afghanistan in 2012. it doesn't seem to be the case. if we need to get more answers. jenna: we'll look for more information. we continue to cover the story throughout the day here on fox news. peter, thanks for your insight. >> thanks for having me. jon: one town's attempt to go green has some folks seeing red amid complaints wind turbines are making people sick. all this could end up costing taxpayers millions. we're live with that story. >>> plus, what do you get when you cross a rodeo, kids and sheep? the answer is on the way. [ male announcer ] how do you measure happiness? by the armful? by the barrelful? e carful? how about...
'hanlon, senior fellow of foreign policy studies at the brookings institution. essentially the pentagon counted attacks taken place against, you know, anti-taliban forces and found them down about 7% but then somebody said, oh, wait a minute. we forgot to count attacks on afghan-led units. seems a little surprising. >> it is clearly a mistake they should not have made. on the other hand i'm sure it wasn't intentional. by the way the number of attacks against afghan units were a lot more than 7% of the total. the good news in 2012 the war hasn't gone away, the fighting hasn't gone away, the war has not ended if our role is declining. afghan security forces are doing more and more fighting. the number of attacks against them the fatalities they suffered three times or four times as many as coalition fatalities. it may even be more or five. the as we pulled out our troops during the fighting season the a evident loo the violence didn't get worse. the afghan security forces did more and more of the fighting. i'm not saying this is good news. in the context of an overall transition to a afghan-led e
on the pentagon in ten days or so march 1st. that's when it's scheduled to kick in. you heard the president railing about it there. i'm jon scott along with jenna lee. a.b. stoddard is associate editor and a columnist for "the hill." the president railed about congress and this terrible law that was passed without mentioning that it was a white house idea, right? >> right. it is an idea that originated in the white house, but republicans certainly voted for the budget control act in 2011, which included the sequester, because they too thought it could be reversed or undone or replaced. and we're looking 18 months later at -- ten days as you said, not enough time to change these cuts. there is an acceptance in washington in both parties that it's going to go through, and both the white house, which is more recent, but the republican party as well have both said that this sky is going to fall if the sequester goes through. both are come police in it saying that these cuts are draconian and indiscriminate and irresponsible but here we are with both of them unable to come to an agreement. so th
than making them automatic meat cleaver cuts as so many worry about they would give the pentagon some discretion and latitude to target the spending cuts themselves. whether they will reduce the number of spending cuts that hit the pentagon and the dod that remains to be seen. what we do understand is in a few hours the republicans in both the house and senate will say let's give the pentagon some jurisdiction over these spending cuts rather than imposing automatic cuts that in some cases could do more damage than good. jon. jon: carl cameron on capitol hill in washington thank you. jenna: as the president looks for a short-term solution to the nation's spending problem the congressional budget office has come out with a new and quite frankly disturbing report about our financial situation, our soaring debt. right now our debt is at a record of more than $16 trillion. in just ten years the cbo says that number will grow to become 77% of what we produce, what our economy proceed dies. gdp. horry rolori rot man is with us. >> these projections are the latest evidence showing that our go
highlighted recently after the pentagon looked at ban on women serving in combat. while there's a lot of talk about the future of women in the military, we haven't spent a lot of time what the reality is for them now. that is the subject of a new book by an author known for her book turned tv series, "army wives". you might know that. her new book, umdaunted. the real story of american kfs women in the military. on bookstores today. congratulations. a big accomplishment. >> thank you very much. jenna: we don't spend a lot of time what is actually going on right now. you followed some women over a five, six-year period. tell us a little bit about the reality that they face. >> well, with this book i wanted to see what does it take to really be a successful servicewoman, what does it take? so i found these four extraordinary women who are all trailblazers. but the thing about the military is, professional success often comes at a personal price for both men and women but women face their own set of unique challenges that they often deal with out of public view. i wanted to examine that. jenna:
the confirmation of former senator chuck hagel to head the pentagon seems more likely. senate republicans successfully held up the process seeking clarification about mr. hagel's views on israel and iran and pressed the administration for more answers about the deadly benghazi terrorist attack. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel is live in washington with more details on all of this. mike, what is the latest from top republicans from the hab gel nomination. >> reporter: senator john mccain said what we've been reporting which is after this recess the senate will up the nomination and the expectation senator chuck hagel will votes necessary to be confirmed. his colleague, senator lindsey graham explained why. >> because i do believe the president has great deference. here's the question for of the country. can we do better than that? i think so. the president chose a controversial nominee that refuses to sign letters supporting israel during the 2000 infin todd today. refused to iranian guard as terrorist organization. refused to sign a letter asking the e.u. designates hezboll
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)